Article: The Miami Heat and the NBA

[gts]

The Miami Heat and the NBA’s Double Standard of ‘Sacrifice’

Why superstar players seeking max salaries are stuck between a rock and a hard place — while NBA owners are laughing all the way to the bank

BY ZACH LOWE ON JULY 8, 2014

In a time of hushed meetings and amorphous potential offers, the Rockets have transformed a thought exercise into a real thing by presenting Chris Bosh a concrete choice: take a pay cut to stay in Miami, or earn your full maximum salary over a four-year deal in Houston.

It’s not quite the ideal test case for a new collective bargaining agreement designed with perhaps one eye on engineering “competitive balance” by making it harder for teams to retain superstar clusters. Adam Silver trumpeted that catchphrase every chance he got during the 2011 lockout, but the league’s primary goal during that torturous offseason was to transfer cash from players to owners.

Silver is sincere in his desire for greater parity, and the easiest path to achieving it is to prevent in-their-prime superstars from teaming up. The new CBA attempted to do that by installing a super-harsh luxury tax. Spend a lot on players, and you’re going to face a crippling tax penalty that gets more severe as you add payroll. Superstars are expensive to sign and even more expensive to keep; the tax was crafted to make the “keeping” part prohibitive.

But that’s only part of the story. The league also beefed up that tax so more money would flow from big-spending teams to their (mostly) smaller-market brothers, who need those tax proceeds to pad their bottom lines. It is a revenue-sharing mechanism. Any impact on competitive balance would be a happy ripple effect.

And

The Nets are anything but a model of prudent spending. They are a spook story about what can happen when a team loses all of its flexibility and patience, leaving it to desperately flip one expensive contract for an even more expensive one that runs longer.

But the Heat could have proceeded down a less frugal path, giving raises to their own free agents (via Bird rights) and digging deeper to find quality players without using the full midlevel and triggering the apron. Hell, the Heat got Allen and Battier using the smaller midlevel exception for tax teams — the one they deemed not good enough to snag McRoberts this time around. Fill out the roster with that toolbox, and there’s no need for the guys producing the wins to take haircuts.

Granger is going to make only about $700,000 more than his minimum salary, and he didn’t produce at a rate that merits much more than that last season. McRoberts had a nice season, and the market for bigs who can shoot, walk upright, and hold a basketball is climbing fast.

But Klempner’s point is this: The Heat are asking their stars to forfeit millions so the team can pay McRoberts and Granger an extra $2.7 million per year combined and Arison’s Carnival Cruise Lines can continue to offer the very best in overstuffed buffets and kitsch. And the Heat have opted against just re-signing their own guys because the roster they built was no longer good enough. Whose fault is that?

The entire article here. long read but worth the time

http://grantland.com/features/nba-mi...s-free-agency/

[RichieW]

This is a misconception peddled by the media. Stars taking less money has nothing to do with saving the rich owners money, it's about having more to build the roster.

Stars give up money to give it to other players, not so owners can make more.

[HurricaneKid]

This is a misconception peddled by the media. Stars taking less money has nothing to do with saving the rich owners money, it's about having more to build the roster.

Stars give up money to give it to other players, not so owners can make more.

Zach Lowe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richie W.

Somehow the owners, who GUTTED the players in the last two CBAs and have seen the values of their franchises explode, have been able to convince guys like Richie W that if players want to win they will take less. NO. They can spend a ton. None of them will. Its a big reason LeBron is bolting. Arison promised him money wouldn't stand in the way of winning. Then he amnestied an integral member of the team who ended up having a fantastic season elsewhere and traded another longterm member of the team. Then didn't even use that TPE to improve the team.

[gts]

This is a misconception peddled by the media. Stars taking less money has nothing to do with saving the rich owners money, it's about having more to build the roster.

Stars give up money to give it to other players, not so owners can make more.

I think you missed the point of the article..

the point is they shouldn't have to do that when they are already underpaid compared to other major sports

They shouldn't have to do that because owners make bad decisions

Some owners want championship level teams, that requires championship level talent the owners should be the ones footing the bill not as in the case of the Heat maneuvering themselves into a position on purpose where they run up against the 81 million dollar cap limit forcing the big named players to take less if they want to stay on the team or have a competitive team.

Arinson is wealthy beyond comprehension, he could pay the taxes out of his pocket change, his players who are in their primes both physically and in earning power shouldn't be having to take pay cuts to make his team competitive

[Real Men Wear Green]

This is a misconception peddled by the media. Stars taking less money has nothing to do with saving the rich owners money, it's about having more to build the roster.

Stars give up money to give it to other players, not so owners can make more.

The overall effect of a cap is absolutely about getting the owners more money in general. After they limit what each team can pay to players stars are forced to take less if they want to play with other stars but the players shouldn't forget why they are forced to "sacrifice." Remove the cap and Kevin Durant's next contract pays him 40 million per year regardless of who else is on his team.

[DukeDelonte13]

I thought it was a good piece but I disagree with the sentiment that the new CBA isn't helping build parity.

[Sarcastic]

I thought it was a good piece but I disagree with the sentiment that the new CBA isn't helping build parity.

Hmmm. Last 2 finals had the same exact teams. Heat have made 4 straight finals. That doesn't seem like parity to me.

[HurricaneKid]

Hmmm. Last 2 finals had the same exact teams. Heat have made 4 straight finals. That doesn't seem like parity to me.

Did you know that ONE team voted against the CBA? That team was Miami. Because they felt the CBA was designed SPECIFICALLY to break up the team.

If you haven't noticed, it might be doing just that.

[LA_Showtime]

Keep in mind we're still in the early stages of the new CBA. I'm sure teams and players alike will adjust going forward.